Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2021 Dec 21;326(23):2395-2404.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.21222.

Association of Rivaroxaban vs Apixaban With Major Ischemic or Hemorrhagic Events in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Association of Rivaroxaban vs Apixaban With Major Ischemic or Hemorrhagic Events in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Wayne A Ray et al. JAMA. .

Erratum in

  • Error in Figure.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] JAMA. 2022 Apr 5;327(13):1294. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.4059. JAMA. 2022. PMID: 35380601 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Abstract

Importance: The comparative effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban, the most frequently prescribed oral anticoagulants for ischemic stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, is uncertain.

Objective: To compare major ischemic and hemorrhagic outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with rivaroxaban or apixaban.

Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective cohort study using computerized enrollment and claims files for US Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older. Between January 1, 2013, and November 30, 2018, a total of 581 451 patients with atrial fibrillation began rivaroxaban or apixaban treatment and were followed up for 4 years, through November 30, 2018.

Exposures: Rivaroxaban (n = 227 572) and apixaban (n = 353 879), either standard or reduced dose.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was a composite of major ischemic (stroke/systemic embolism) and hemorrhagic (intracerebral hemorrhage/other intracranial bleeding/fatal extracranial bleeding) events. Secondary outcomes were nonfatal extracranial bleeding and total mortality (fatal ischemic/hemorrhagic event or other death during follow-up). Rates, hazard ratios (HRs), and rate differences (RDs) were adjusted for baseline differences in comorbidity with inverse probability of treatment weighting.

Results: Study patients (mean age, 77.0 years; 291 966 [50.2%] women; 134 393 [23.1%] receiving reduced dose) had 474 605 person-years of follow-up (median [IQR] of 174 [62-397] days). The adjusted primary outcome rate for rivaroxaban was 16.1 per 1000 person-years vs 13.4 per 1000 person-years for apixaban (RD, 2.7 [95% CI, 1.9-3.5]; HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.12-1.24]). The rivaroxaban group had increased risk for both major ischemic events (8.6 vs 7.6 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.5-1.7]; HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.04-1.20]) and hemorrhagic events (7.5 vs 5.9 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.1-2.1]; HR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.16-1.36]), including fatal extracranial bleeding (1.4 vs 1.0 per 1000 person-years; RD, 0.4 [95% CI, 0.2-0.7]; HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.18-1.70]). Patients receiving rivaroxaban had increased risk of nonfatal extracranial bleeding (39.7 vs 18.5 per 1000 person-years; RD, 21.1 [95% CI, 20.0-22.3]; HR, 2.07 [95% CI, 1.99-2.15]), fatal ischemic/hemorrhagic events (4.5 vs 3.3 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.2 [95% CI, 0.8-1.6]; HR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.21-1.48]), and total mortality (44.2 vs 41.0 per 1000 person-years; RD, 3.1 [95% CI, 1.8-4.5]; HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.09]). The risk of the primary outcome was increased for rivaroxaban in both those receiving the reduced dose (27.4 vs 21.0 per 1000 person-years; RD, 6.4 [95% CI, 4.1-8.7]; HR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.16-1.40]) and the standard dose (13.2 vs 11.4 per 1000 person-years; RD, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.0-2.6]; HR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.06-1.21]) groups.

Conclusions and relevance: Among Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older with atrial fibrillation, treatment with rivaroxaban compared with apixaban was associated with a significantly increased risk of major ischemic or hemorrhagic events.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Ray reported receiving grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) during the conduct of the study. Dr Chung reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health and grants from Veterans Affairs during the conduct of the study. Mr Daugherty reported receiving grants from NHLBI during the conduct of the study. Dr Hung reported receiving grants from Veterans Affairs during the conduct of the study. Dr Murray reported a patent pending with Vanderbilt University Medical Center from Metabolic Technologies outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Selection and Inclusion of Participants in a Study of the Association of Rivaroxaban vs Apixaban With Major Ischemic or Hemorrhagic Events in Atrial Fibrillation
aApixaban (2.5 mg or 5 mg twice/d) or rivaroxaban (15 mg or 20 mg once/d). bDeep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, hip/knee replacement, femur/tibia/patella fracture, thrombectomy, or chronic hypercoagulable state. cStage 4 or 5 or end-stage chronic kidney disease. dDiagnosis of hyperthyroidism or open coronary artery bypass graft/open cardiac valve surgery.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Primary Outcome in a Study of the Association of Rivaroxaban vs Apixaban With Major Ischemic or Hemorrhagic Events in Atrial Fibrillation
Adjusted cumulative incidence of major ischemic (ischemic stroke or systemic embolism) or hemorrhagic (hemorrhagic stroke, other intracranial bleeding, fatal extracranial bleeding) events. The median (IQR) follow-up time was 5.8 (2.1-13.2) months. Adjusted with inverse probability of treatment weighting; the variables used in the adjustment are shown in eTable 5 in the Supplement.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Outcomes by Medication Dose in a Study of the Association of Rivaroxaban vs Apixaban With Major Ischemic or Hemorrhagic Events in Atrial Fibrillation
Adjusted incidence of study outcomes according to anticoagulant dose. Rates, rate differences, and hazard ratios were adjusted with inverse probability of treatment weighting; the variables used in the adjustment are shown in eTable 5 in the Supplement. See eTable 9 in the Supplement for numbers of events.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kornej J, Börschel CS, Benjamin EJ, Schnabel RB. Epidemiology of atrial fibrillation in the 21st century: novel methods and new insights. Circ Res. 2020;127(1):4-20. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.120.316340 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Zimetbaum P. Atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166(5):ITC33-ITC48. doi: 10.7326/AITC201703070 - DOI - PubMed
    1. January CT, Wann LS, Calkins H, et al. 2019 AHA/ACC/HRS focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS guideline for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society in collaboration with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation. 2019;140(2):e125-e151. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000665 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zhu J, Alexander GC, Nazarian S, Segal JB, Wu AW. Trends and variation in oral anticoagulant choice in patients with atrial fibrillation, 2010-2017. Pharmacotherapy. 2018;38(9):907-920. doi: 10.1002/phar.2158 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gong IY, Kim RB. Importance of pharmacokinetic profile and variability as determinants of dose and response to dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban. Can J Cardiol. 2013;29(7)(suppl):S24-S33. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2013.04.002 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms